Message:

<p>[QUOTE=&quot;krispy, post: 629016, member: 19065&quot;]A lot of people know a lot of stuff that &#039;seems&#039; like common knowledge, but that doesn&#039;t imply they are correct and factual in their claims. Just re-posting data taken from somewhere else is essentially plagarised and appears to be left here to stoke fear in the gold bugs. </p><p><br /></p><p>Mintage information is publically available, but it usually is not accurate until several years later and merely takes patience to wait for and a little effort to seek out. The same effort should be applied to citing ones sources to data and figures posted on this topic.</p><p><br /></p><p>I would never blow off <u>anyone</u> here or elsewhere but I DO fully discount <b>elaine_1970&#039;s</b> gold and China comments in the current context if they remain without attribution and link to published sources. It&#039;s fine to give one&#039;s thoughts on a matter and add to the discourse but this user is not doing that at all, instead just dropping semi-well timed nuggets of unsubstantiated news culled from elsewhere. These figures seem off to others on this thread when considered to current events and published data and nothing the user posts is ever contested, until now. The user ignores the discussion and continues to post data consistently without regard for the above mentioned authentification issues. The users figures lead to misinformation and pointless speculation, thus doing a diservice to this thread.</p><p><br /></p><p>The internet and data do not exist just for copy and pasting the same thing again and again, but if that is what someone want&#039;s to do, then at least put a source to your data (especially when it&#039;s being requested by others) so everyone can weigh the information you&#039;ve cited from original sources. Question everything.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>

Your name or email address:

Do you already have an account?

• No, create an account now.
• Yes, my password is:
• Forgot your password?

Stay logged in